Errors when conducting a forensic medical expert assessment in the field of anesthesiology and resuscitation in criminal cases: a case series

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: The forensic medical examination of “medical criminal cases” is the “cornerstone” on the conclusions of which the results of the trial and the further fate of our colleagues largely depend. Therefore, the medical community wants the conclusion of experts (including anesthesiologists and ICU physicians) to be completely objective, scientifically based, not biased and based not on the subjective opinion of an expert, but on specific regulatory documents. OBJECTIVE: To identify typical errors and improve the quality of expert assessment of medical care in the field of “anesthesiology-intensive care”. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis of some forensic medical examinations in criminal cases with the participation of an anesthesiologist and ICU physicians part of the experts was carried out. RESULTS: As a result of the analysis of the conclusions of the forensic medical examinations under consideration, significant shortcomings were identified that could have a significant impact on the results of the consideration of criminal cases and contribute to the imposition of unjustified convictions. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to create a legal mechanism for certification of doctors of specialties to allow them as experts to conduct complex forensic medical examinations and state control over the quality of their work.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.